IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v19y2022i3p220-228.html

Uncommon Knowledge in Multiparty Auctions

Author

Listed:
  • David Banks

    (Department of Statistical Science, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708)

  • Yi Guo

    (Hudson River Trading, New York, New York 10007)

Abstract

The pure strategy Nash equilibrium (PSNE) solution to multiparty auctions makes the strong but unrealistic assumption that all participants share the same beliefs about the type distributions of the others, and that all know that this information is mutually known. This paper proposes two alternative analyses of such auction problems that do not make that presupposition. The first is based on a solution concept similar to the PSNE. The second is employs the level k thinking solution concept.

Suggested Citation

  • David Banks & Yi Guo, 2022. "Uncommon Knowledge in Multiparty Auctions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 220-228, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:220-228
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2022.0454
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.2022.0454
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2022.0454?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stahl, Dale II & Wilson, Paul W., 1994. "Experimental evidence on players' models of other players," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 309-327, December.
    2. Vincent P. Crawford & Nagore Iriberri, 2007. "Level-k Auctions: Can a Nonequilibrium Model of Strategic Thinking Explain the Winner's Curse and Overbidding in Private-Value Auctions?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(6), pages 1721-1770, November.
    3. Stahl Dale O. & Wilson Paul W., 1995. "On Players' Models of Other Players: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 218-254, July.
    4. Lebrun, Bernard, 1999. "First Price Auctions in the Asymmetric N Bidder Case," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 40(1), pages 125-142, February.
    5. Timothy C. Au & David Banks & Yi Guo, 2021. "Numerical Solution of Asymmetric Auctions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 321-334, December.
    6. Insua, Insua Rios & Rios, Jesus & Banks, David, 2009. "Adversarial Risk Analysis," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 104(486), pages 841-854.
    7. Athey, Susan, 2001. "Single Crossing Properties and the Existence of Pure Strategy Equilibria in Games of Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 861-889, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Rios Insua & David Banks & Jesus Rios, 2016. "Modeling Opponents in Adversarial Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 742-755, April.
    2. Kaplan, Todd R. & Zamir, Shmuel, 2015. "Advances in Auctions," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    3. Casey Rothschild & Laura McLay & Seth Guikema, 2012. "Adversarial Risk Analysis with Incomplete Information: A Level‐k Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(7), pages 1219-1231, July.
    4. Quement, Mark T. Le & Marcin, Isabel, 2020. "Communication and voting in heterogeneous committees: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 449-468.
    5. Binswanger, Johannes & Prüfer, Jens, 2012. "Democracy, populism, and (un)bounded rationality," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 358-372.
    6. Florian Gauer & Christoph Kuzmics, 2020. "Cognitive Empathy In Conflict Situations," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1659-1678, November.
    7. Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Szech, Nora, 2023. "Designing contests between heterogeneous contestants: An experimental study of tie-breaks and bid-caps in all-pay auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    8. Wright, James R. & Leyton-Brown, Kevin, 2017. "Predicting human behavior in unrepeated, simultaneous-move games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 16-37.
    9. Mark T. Le Quement & Isabel Marcin, 2016. "Communication and voting in heterogeneous committees: An experimental study," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics 2016_05, Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics, revised Oct 2016.
    10. Breitmoser, Yves & Tan, Jonathan H.W. & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2014. "On the beliefs off the path: Equilibrium refinement due to quantal response and level-k," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 102-125.
    11. Herings, P. Jean-Jacques & Khan, Abhimanyu, 2025. "Network stability under limited foresight," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 62-92.
    12. Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Sheremeta, Roman & Szech, Nora, 2016. "Designing Contests Between Heterogeneous Contestants: An Experimental Study of Tie-Breaks and Bid-Caps in All-Pay Auctions," MPRA Paper 71202, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Berger, Ulrich & De Silva, Hannelore & Fellner-Röhling, Gerlinde, 2016. "Cognitive hierarchies in the minimizer game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 337-348.
    14. Alexander Matros & Wooyoung Lim & Theodore Turocy, 2009. "Raising Revenue With Raffles: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," Working Paper 377, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Feb 2009.
    15. Paulo Fagandini & Ingemar Dierickx, 2023. "Correction: Computing Profit-Maximizing Bid Shading Factors in First-Price Sealed-Bid Auctions," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 1037-1037, March.
    16. Malin Arve & Marco Serena, 2016. "Level-k Models Rationalize Overspending in Contests," Working Papers tax-mpg-rps-2018-09, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
    17. Gerber, Anke & Wichardt, Philipp C., 2010. "Iterated reasoning and welfare-enhancing instruments in the centipede game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 74(1-2), pages 123-136, May.
    18. Malmendier, Ulrike & Szeidl, Adam, 2020. "Fishing for fools," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 105-129.
    19. Peter G Moffatt & Ganna Pogrebna & Graciela Zevallos-Porles, 2020. "Depth of Reasoning Models with Sophisticated Agents," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 20-06, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    20. Meub, Lukas & Proeger, Till & Hüning, Hendrik, 2013. "A comparison of endogenous and exogenous timing in a social learning experiment," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 167, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:220-228. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.